(Please don't reply off-list. If the conversation starts on the list,
please leave it there unless there is a VERY GOOD reason).
On Monday May 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/19/06, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday May 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As i can see the bitmap do exactly this, but the default bitmap is too
small!
Why do you say that?
Are you using an internal bitmap, or a bitmap in a separate file?
I was using bitmap in a separate file.
Why i said that tha bitmap is too small? I try to explain:
the raid device is a raid1, created on /dev/md0 trought mdadm, and the
bitmap use a 4 kb chunk-size on external file (in root directory)
setfaulty /dev/md0 /dev/nda
raidhotremove /dev/md0 /dev/nda
cd /mnt/md0
wget http://... (240 kb file...)
raidhotadd /dev/md0 /dev/nda
And now dmesg said that the bitmap was obsolete (01 or something like that)
and that the md driver will force a total recovery.
raidhotadd doesn't know anything about bitmaps.
If you use 'mdadm /dev/mda --add /dev/nda' you should find that it
works better.
I recommend getting rid of setfaulty / raidhotadd /raidhotremove etc
and just using mdadm.
NeilBrown
A recovery of 40 gb for a 240 kb file is a little bit expensive.. :-)
Unfortunately i cannot give you the exact output because the server is down
now.:-|
The only way to control the size of the bitmap is the change the
bitmap chunk size.
Okay thanks.
Warning: if you have more than 1 million bits in the bitmap, the
kernel may fail in memory allocation and may not be able to assemble
your array.
Thankyou for your help.
Stefano.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
